There should be a 10x penalty for this kind of shiat. It's compensation that he earned through his employment. How is there any question that it should be paid to his estate??? Did they also try to take back the money paid to his retirement fund? I hope she contacts every other widow who had a spouse working for that company and tells them to go demand payment for unused holiday pay. Farking scumbags. And that's an insult to scum. Sorry, scum.

vpb:Because employers are so greedy that they will try to cheat the dependents of an employees out of pay that they earned?

Particularly the Job Creating Small Business Owner Heroes (TM) who aren't bound by corporate policies and procedures.The greediest, scummiest employers I've ever had have all been small businesses. From being consistently told rules for benefit eligibility have changed, to arbitrarily lowering my commission rate as a salesperson, to trying to weasel out of paying overtime, they were the worst. The big companies have HR departments that follow written procedures so as to cover their asses agains lawsuits.

chevydeuce:vpb: Because employers are so greedy that they will try to cheat the dependents of an employees out of pay that they earned?

Eh, the government is going to take a massive bite out of the money anyway....but that's okay, right?

Well yeah, because in Europe, you get healthcare, a reasonable amount of paid vacation, education, family leave, and so forth WITHOUT having to fight tooth and nail for them. You know, because they don't spend all their money subsidizing the most profitable industry the world has known, or ensuring tax dodges remain for billionaires, or feeding the ever-hungry military industrial complex.

skrame:I ... disagree with this ruling. The benefit isn't pay, it is time off. The employee should have taken the time off when he could.

I have benefits such as a health club discount that I don't use, but my employer shouldn't be on the hook for that if I die while I work there.

/hides, because my unpopular opinion will be ravaged

Actually no. Paid time off is not just time off, it is a form of compensation. Your health club reimbursement is a discretionary benefit. In California if you do not take your allotment you either have to get paid out or accrue time.

All2morrowsparTs:ctually no. Paid time off is not just time off, it is a form of compensation. Your health club reimbursement is a discretionary benefit. In California if you do not take your allotment you either have to get paid out or accrue time

Ahh... where I work I earn unpaid vacation days. The privilege of not working, but not getting paid. If I take time off without first earning it, it counts against me (I don't get docked, but I do get fired. It's a nightmare arranging things like car maintenance/repair, doctor appointments, family emergencies, etc.).

Having been accustomed to such a system I was inclined like skrame to disagree with the ruling.

xkillyourfacex:All2morrowsparTs: ctually no. Paid time off is not just time off, it is a form of compensation. Your health club reimbursement is a discretionary benefit. In California if you do not take your allotment you either have to get paid out or accrue time

Ahh... where I work I earn unpaid vacation days. The privilege of not working, but not getting paid. If I take time off without first earning it, it counts against me (I don't get docked, but I do get fired. It's a nightmare arranging things like car maintenance/repair, doctor appointments, family emergencies, etc.).

Having been accustomed to such a system I was inclined like skrame to disagree with the ruling.

All2morrowsparTs:skrame: I ... disagree with this ruling. The benefit isn't pay, it is time off. The employee should have taken the time off when he could.

I have benefits such as a health club discount that I don't use, but my employer shouldn't be on the hook for that if I die while I work there.

/hides, because my unpopular opinion will be ravaged

Actually no. Paid time off is not just time off, it is a form of compensation. Your health club reimbursement is a discretionary benefit. In California if you do not take your allotment you either have to get paid out or accrue time.

And to add, it is compensation earned the year prior or prior to his illness. Since it is already earned, why should the employee not receive it? If I die during a shift, shouldn't I (i.e. my estate) get paid for the hours worked that week prior to my passing?